How do I know which Bible is the right one?

[Thaddaeus]

in the Beginning God created the heaven and the earth, and on the second day he seperated the heavens thus making two or more or heavens but this was on the second day, not in the beginning so if a translations reads :

Ge 1:1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.(KJB) it is a correct translation

if the Bible is the word of God, which can not lie. Then His word must be true, how can you have a true word of God/bible if the very opening verse is not true?
Genesis 1:1 (New International Version)


Genesis 1

The Beginning

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Genesis 1:7-8 (New International Version)

7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

Genesis 1:1 (New King James Version)


Genesis 1

The History of Creation

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Genesis 1:1 (New Living Translation)


Genesis 1

The Account of Creation

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.[a]


Footnotes:

1. Genesis 1:1 Or In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, . . . Or When God began to create the heavens and the earth, . . .

Genesis 1:1 (New American Standard Bible)


Genesis 1

The Creation

1(A)In the beginning (B)God (C)created the heavens and the earth.


Cross references:

1. Genesis 1:1 : Ps 102:25; Is 40:21; John 1:1, 2; Heb 1:10
2. Genesis 1:1 : Ps 89:11; 90:2; Acts 17:24; Rom 1:20; Heb 11:3
3. Genesis 1:1 : Job 38:4; Is 42:5; 45:18; Rev 4:11

Genesis 1:1 (Amplified Bible)


Genesis 1

1IN THE beginning God (prepared, formed, fashioned, and) created the heavens and the earth.(A)


Cross references:

1. Genesis 1:1 : Heb 11:3

<H2 id=passage_heading>Genesis 1:1 (New Century Version)</H2>
<H4>Genesis 1</H4><H5>The Beginning of All Things

The Beginning of the World

1 In the beginning God created the sky and the earth.


Genesis 1:1 (Darby Translation)


Genesis 1

1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.


</H5>

 

[machew]

in the Beginning God created the heaven and the earth, and on the second day he seperated the heavens thus making two or more or heavens but this was on the second day, not in the beginning so if a translations reads :

Ge 1:1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.(KJB) it is a correct translation

if the Bible is the word of God, which can not lie. Then His word must be true, how can you have a true word of God/bible if the very opening verse is not true?
Genesis 1:1 (New International Version)


Genesis 1

The Beginning

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Genesis 1:7-8 (New International Version)

7 So God made the expanse and separated the water under the expanse from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the expanse "sky." And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.

Genesis 1:1 (New King James Version)


Genesis 1

The History of Creation

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.

Genesis 1:1 (New Living Translation)


Genesis 1

The Account of Creation

1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.[a]


Footnotes:

1. Genesis 1:1 Or In the beginning when God created the heavens and the earth, . . . Or When God began to create the heavens and the earth, . . .

Genesis 1:1 (New American Standard Bible)


Genesis 1

The Creation

1(A)In the beginning (B)God (C)created the heavens and the earth.


Cross references:

1. Genesis 1:1 : Ps 102:25; Is 40:21; John 1:1, 2; Heb 1:10
2. Genesis 1:1 : Ps 89:11; 90:2; Acts 17:24; Rom 1:20; Heb 11:3
3. Genesis 1:1 : Job 38:4; Is 42:5; 45:18; Rev 4:11

Genesis 1:1 (Amplified Bible)


Genesis 1

1IN THE beginning God (prepared, formed, fashioned, and) created the heavens and the earth.(A)


Cross references:

1. Genesis 1:1 : Heb 11:3

<H2 id=passage_heading>Genesis 1:1 (New Century Version)</H2>
<H4>Genesis 1</H4><H5>The Beginning of All Things

The Beginning of the World

1 In the beginning God created the sky and the earth.


Genesis 1:1 (Darby Translation)


Genesis 1

1In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.


</H5>

600 pages of research by a respected Bible scholar on the King James vs. other translations, as well as the many discrepancies in the King James Version:

http://books.google.com/books?id=hL...=problems with the King James Version&f=false


This argument is moot.

 

[Cup-of-Ruin]

This is the long awaited new translation into English of the Greek Septaugint;

http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/nets/edition/

and the New Testament, the most precise translation from greek is

Nestle-Aland 26th Edition New Testament also known as UBS3 (United Bible Societies)

 

[MahogonySnail]

How are you going to print 400+ pages I dont think printing machines accept gold bullion.

 

[aspen]

zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

 

[Not_The_Righteous]

Originally Posted by Thaddaeus

in the Beginning God created the heaven and the earth, and on the second day he seperated the heavens thus making two or more or heavens but this was on the second day, not in the beginning so if a translations reads :

Ge 1:1In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.(KJB) it is a correct translation

if the Bible is the word of God, which can not lie. Then His word must be true, how can you have a true word of God/bible if the very opening verse is not true?

Thad with all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about. The Hebrew word for "heaven" (shamah-yim) only exists in the plural as "yim" is a plural suffix - meaning that translating it either as "heaven" or "heavens" is fine.
Here, I'll take the time to show you:

The literal is " In (the) beginning, he created (God) (the) heavens and the earth (or land)."

Heavens is highlighted in green, and is parsed below. It is a plural absolute. That word always appears that way in the Hebrew text. The Hebrews did not think of "heaven" in the singular, monolithic form that you require.

Which brings me to a point of translation: It's anachronistic and silly to demand something from a translation that requires it to do something not even the original language is doing. To use something you don't even understand as a weapon to attack folks who are very likely God loving people is incredibly suspect.

I beg of you, please stop this and learn what it is you're actually talking about before you inflict it upon others. People do actually get hurt by it.

 

[resurrection33]

It's pretty accurate thought for thought yes. Thought for thought are typically more accurate than word for word.

There is the problem that when a person doesn’t translate word for work, they could substitute their own theology for the one intended by the Bible writer. Some people think that is what has happened with some versions of the Bible.

 

[greatkraw]

[/i]

Thad with all due respect, you don't know what you're talking about. The Hebrew word for "heaven" (shamah-yim) only exists in the plural as "yim" is a plural suffix - meaning that translating it either as "heaven" or "heavens" is fine.
Here, I'll take the time to show you:

The literal is " In (the) beginning, he created (God) (the) heavens and the earth (or land)."

Heavens is highlighted in green, and is parsed below. It is a plural absolute. That word always appears that way in the Hebrew text. The Hebrews did not think of "heaven" in the singular, monolithic form that you require.

Which brings me to a point of translation: It's anachronistic and silly to demand something from a translation that requires it to do something not even the original language is doing. To use something you don't even understand as a weapon to attack folks who are very likely God loving people is incredibly suspect.

I beg of you, please stop this and learn what it is you're actually talking about before you inflict it upon others. People do actually get hurt by it.

Ha Sha Mayim - literally 'The High Waters'


In hebrew you never have water in the singular

so the english word water becomes mayIM (waters)

therefore since heaven is the hi waters it can validly be translated EITHER Heaven or Heavens

 

[MahogonySnail]

There is the problem that when a person doesn’t translate word for work, they could substitute their own theology for the one intended by the Bible writer. Some people think that is what has happened with some versions of the Bible.

The chances of a new believer or even a mature believer in this day and age, getting the correct interpretation by reading a word for word translation is probably 5%.

 

[Thaddaeus]

600 pages of research by a respected Bible scholar on the King James vs. other translations, as well as the many discrepancies in the King James Version:

http://books.google.com/books?id=hL...=problems with the King James Version&f=false


This argument is moot.

if you compare the kjb which was from the majority text with the minority text you can create all kind of discrepancies, with a word has three defintions, and the Kjb uses one and you use another you could claim you are right the they are wrong , but doesn't mean a thing , go ahead prove that the Holy Bible is full of errors but shouldn't that be a job for non-believers, oh yeah wait of the bible scholars that attack the authorized version of the Holy scripture, aree they of God? and if not then why should we take any stock in anything they have to say. wouldn't it be a blasphemer that speaks Bad of any Holy thing Of God, and we are suppose to follow a blasphemer HHHHMMMM VERY INTERESTING!!!!!!!!!! I just gave proof from scriptures who u going to trust the Word of God or man????

 

[MahogonySnail]

The bible scholars who point out errors in the king james are honest and devoted men of God. Unlike the KJV-onlyist liars who pretend that they don't exist.

 

[Thaddaeus]

Ha Sha Mayim - literally 'The High Waters'


In hebrew you never have water in the singular

so the english word water becomes mayIM (waters)

therefore since heaven is the hi waters it can validly be translated EITHER Heaven or Heavens

as I said earlier dude you have to use the same manuscript, your manuscript was corrupt so you prove nothing, looks like the one that the KJb used is both singular and could be pural



[SIZE=+1]~ymX [/SIZE]Shamayim (shaw-mah'-yim); Noun Masculine, Strong #: 8064

1. heaven, heavens, sky
   1. visible heavens, sky
      1. as abode of the stars
      2. as the visible universe, the sky, atmosphere, etc
   2. Heaven (as the abode of God)

but if you use the place where God lives it is singular

 

[charisenexcelcis]

The originator asked for our advice, not for us to put her under obligation. My advice is that she get a NASB if she wants word-for-word, NIV for thought-for-thought, Phillips for paraphrase.

 

[HumbleSaint]

if you compare the kjb which was from the majority text with the minority text you can create all kind of discrepancies, with a word has three defintions, and the Kjb uses one and you use another you could claim you are right the they are wrong , but doesn't mean a thing , go ahead prove that the Holy Bible is full of errors but shouldn't that be a job for non-believers, oh yeah wait of the bible scholars that attack the authorized version of the Holy scripture, aree they of God? and if not then why should we take any stock in anything they have to say. wouldn't it be a blasphemer that speaks Bad of any Holy thing Of God, and we are suppose to follow a blasphemer HHHHMMMM VERY INTERESTING!!!!!!!!!! I just gave proof from scriptures who u going to trust the Word of God or man????

God bless you keith, The Word of God needs to be defended in these last days. When I first became saved around 6 months ago, I started reading out of the NKJV. Then I studied the changes in the different versions and came to the conclusion that the KJV is the one we should read. It seemed like as soon as I started reading it, I started getting more of an understanding out of it. I started memorizing passages by just reading over it a couple of times. Its like the Holy Spirit was working through it. If you think about it, how can the the Holy Spirit work effectivly through a corrupt verion of tlhe Bible.

Here is what I believe is going to happen. In 1973 they came out with the NIV. Then I think sometime in the last 10 years they came out with the TNIV. There is not that much difference in the 2 translations, exept a several verses lighten the sin of the gays and make a womens roll less feminate. I read that they are going to come out with another NIV in 2011. I wonder how much more they are going to change it this time, maybe they will call Jesus, " The One," slowly but surley God's word is changing and I believe It may cause what the Bible calls the simple to fall for the antichrist.

I'm thankful that I have a KJV that I can understand very well. I am also thankful that it never changes.

 

[Nuhen]

Personally, I believe all translations are flawed, because any time you translate from one language into another - especially from Hebrew to English and Greek to English - you're not going to be able to get it 100% right, no matter how good you are.

So, really, I'd recommend using as many translations as you can. I, personally, have 18+ bibles, and I also know of www.biblestudytools.com that has a ton of translations you can look at.

 

[HumbleSaint]

Personally, I believe all translations are flawed, because any time you translate from one language into another - especially from Hebrew to English and Greek to English - you're not going to be able to get it 100% right, no matter how good you are.

So, really, I'd recommend using as many translations as you can. I, personally, have 18+ bibles, and I also know of www.biblestudytools.com that has a ton of translations you can look at.

18 Bibles that say something different, sounds like a good way to get confused.

So you don't believe that God is able to allow one Bible to be accurate? Its true that man translated it, but don't you still think that God could keep that one Bible flawless?

 

[Thaddaeus]

The bible scholars who point out errors in the king james are honest and devoted men of God. Unlike the KJV-onlyist liars who pretend that they don't exist.

either you are for God or you are against God so you say that someone that attacks The authorized english version of the Holy Word of God are good people HHHHMMMMMM VERY INTERESTING!!!!!! devoted to what blaspheming the Word of God I would say!!!!

 

[ness]

i think the king james verson is the easyest to understand.

 

[Thaddaeus]

18 Bibles that say something different, sounds like a good way to get confused.

So you don't believe that God is able to allow one Bible to be accurate? Its true that man translated it, but don't you still think that God could keep that one Bible flawless?

let's see the KJB is too hard to understand so I get it Now let's pick out 18 perversions and cross reference all them to understand the Word of God , yeah that really simplifies things alot Come on please!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[charisenexcelcis]

let's see the KJB is too hard to understand so I get it Now let's pick out 18 perversions and cross reference all them to understand the Word of God , yeah that really simplifies things alot Come on please!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your argument only undermines translating at all. Whenever you move from one language to another, there are slight variations in the meaning of words. For instance, in the KJV the translators render "agape" as love most of the time, but in I Corinth 13 they change and render it as "charity" because they did not believe that the word love would truly communicate the meaning. Now is it simpler to use a single translation that is easily misunderstood by the modern reader and thus requires constant explanations or the allow the modern reader to use a readable modern version that is identical in meaning to the KJV?